CIP - Novellia Token Standard

Hey guys, my team is developing our Novellia Dashboard, and the existing standard isn’t really cutting it, especially if we want to list 3rd party tokens with minimal effort.

I’m referring to this CIP

There’s a few basic issues I’m trying to resolve here:

  • The existing 721 standard doesn’t support more than one image, or different MIME types. The Novellia standard supports arbitrarily many resources, redundant URLs, and on-chain hashes to verify integrity of centralized storage.
  • 721 doesn’t support level of detail (LOD) for a single resource. Your 30MB 4K illustration either loads or it doesn’t. The Novellia standard allows creating a priority sequence for a single resource_id, so you can load a thumbnail first.
  • 721 doesn’t give a standard way of extending it. If everyone makes their own extensions, at the least, clients should have a common way of telling what they’re looking at. The Novellia standard supports a list of strings to indicate extension. It defines the novellia_1 extension.

Some advantages of this standard:

  • Backed by Rektangular Studios Inc. We need this for certain aspects of Novellia which are under development. 721 doesn’t cut it. You can expect utilities to be added to our Novellia SDK in the future to help clients understand Novellia Standard Tokens with a very low barrier to entry.
  • Our objective is to eventually add some utilities to our TypeScript Novellia SDK (more languages coming), or perhaps break it off into a separate SDK. We want everyone to be able to use our Occulta Novellia tokens once we mint them.

Before I make this a formal CIP, I just want to test the waters to see what people thing. I’ve gone ahead and made this backwards compatible with the 721 standard, and extended it with the features I need for Novellia. This went through one iteration of feedback on our Discord, but I want a lot more than that.

Wiki - Novellia Token Standard

What do you guys think? It needs some more formalization, but I’d like to get some early feedback. I’m still scouring for existing comments on NFT standards, and may apply some updates as necessary.


It’s fine to have multiple standards, the ecosystem can decide. As for PR85 (now CIP 25) the latest conversations before the merge were discussing extending the CIP towards a ‘v2’ (See notes)

1 Like